From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262114AbTD2R0n (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 13:26:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262116AbTD2R0m (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 13:26:42 -0400 Received: from adsl-64-109-89-108.dsl.chcgil.ameritech.net ([64.109.89.108]:35844 "EHLO jb96514.il.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262114AbTD2R0l (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 13:26:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!] From: James Bottomley To: Scott Robert Ladd Cc: tytso@mit.edu, Larry McVoy , Linux Kernel In-Reply-To: <3EAEAADC.9030903@coyotegulch.com> References: <1051466395.2427.62.camel@fuzzy> <3EAE85CB.9070000@techsource.com> <3EAEAADC.9030903@coyotegulch.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-9) Date: 29 Apr 2003 12:38:40 -0500 Message-Id: <1051637921.2502.28.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org The problem is a broken patent system that allows common knowledge to be "protected." I've strongly considered trying to get a patent on B-trees or QuickSort, just to see if the patent office is as foolish as they seem. The reason I can tear down the engine on my truck is because it poses no threat to the manufacturer; no one has a patent on the concept of a piston (though they may patent a specific *type* of piston.) I think you'll find that all patent systems the world over require the invention to be novel and non-obvious. Prior disclosure or publication invalidates the novelty part of this (Except in the US, and only if the patent author published the details). Patent systems also require that the inventor sign a statement certifying themselves as such (i.e. you can't file a patent for something you didn't think of yourself without committing perjury). Obviously, the first judges of the meaning of "novel" and "non-obvious" is the patent office. They do a good job generally, but seem to be having difficulty grappling with the considerable body of computing knowledge outside the rather limited patent domain. The final judge is the court system. Many (and that seems to be about 50% of litigated patents) fail these tests and are ruled invalid The problem today is that the patent office will honor almost anything with a patent; if cars were software, Ford would have a patent on pistons that would prevent GM from building V-8s. I'll agree with this, but the patent office is trying to catch up here. Perhaps a quick fix would be to publish patents 3 months before issue for a "bounty" period during which anyone could submit prior art or non-obviousness arguments for consideration before the final decision on issuance. There is nothing wrong with the original conception of patents and copyrights: the protection of IP creators to profit from their work before it enters the public domain in a reasonable time period. Sadly, corporations have legal rights, and the money to pervert the process. Patents and copyrights need to be fixed, not destroyed. Anyone with sufficent resources can pervert any process they set their mind to, be it legal or legislative (DMCA anyone?). The balance in the system is the noise made by those affected by this. James